|
|
New Portable Radio for Digital Satellite
From www.digitalradiotech.co.uk (there's a picture of it on there)
Sky Gnome - New Portable Radio for Satellite Sky have announced that they're launching a new portable radio in October which will allow users to listen to the 80+ digital radio stations available on digital satellite. The Sky Gnome is compatible with all Sky digiboxes and has a range of 30 metres. It is not clear yet whether it will only be available for Sky subscribers or whether anybody with a Sky digibox will be able to purchase one. Customers with Sky+ will also be able to listen to radio shows recorded in their Sky+ planner. As well as there being far more radio stations available on digital satellite than on DAB the audio quality of the radio stations on satellite is significantly higher than on DAB due to the bit rates used by DAB stations being far too low. A list of the radio stations available on digital satellite and the bit rates they use can be found in the table at the bottom of this page. -- Steve - www.digitalradiotech.co.uk - Digital Radio News & Info Find the cheapest Freeview, DAB & MP3 Player Prices: http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/fr..._receivers.htm http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/da...tal_radios.htm http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/mp...rs_1GB-5GB.htm http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/mp...e_capacity.htm |
I've looked at the above links, but sorry, you can't have a portable
digital satellite radio receiver (because it would require its own satellite dish!). If it's some sort of portable rf link back to a digibox ("battery powered videosender"), then ok, that would work, but not enough info is given to make this clear. Not brilliant, because whatever DAB's drawbacks, it really is portable, and also has local radio (Sky doesn't). |
"spiney" wrote in message ups.com... I've looked at the above links, but sorry, you can't have a portable digital satellite radio receiver (because it would require its own satellite dish!). If it's some sort of portable rf link back to a digibox ("battery powered videosender"), then ok, that would work, but not enough info is given to make this clear. Not brilliant, because whatever DAB's drawbacks, it really is portable, and also has local radio (Sky doesn't). If it is an "audio sender/reciever" then it dosn't sound like you watch a SKY TV channel whilst someone else is listening to a Sky radio channel in another room. |
spiney wrote:
I've looked at the above links, but sorry, you can't have a portable digital satellite radio receiver (because it would require its own satellite dish!). If it's some sort of portable rf link back to a digibox ("battery powered videosender"), then ok, that would work, but not enough info is given to make this clear. You can happily stuff a SPDIF digital audio signal through an 'analogue' video sender, and therefore have a 'digital' transmission path, perhaps Sky are thinking along these lines ? -- Mark Please replace invalid and invalid with gmx and net to reply. |
spiney wrote:
I've looked at the above links, but sorry, you can't have a portable digital satellite radio receiver (because it would require its own satellite dish!). What, you mean that XM Radio (http://www.xmradio.com/learn/) and in particular the Delphi XM MyFi (http://www.xmradio.com/myfi/) can't exist? Bit of a shame that. -- Angus G Rae Science & Engineering Support Team University of Edinburgh The above opinions are mine, and Edinburgh University can't have them |
Fair enough, and there's also Worldspace in Europe (not to mention
digital shortwave broadcasting), I was really thinking ot "the usual" Ku band stuff! You could have a genuine Ku band portable, by using a "dielectric" sat antenna, but would still be very "klunky", not pocket size! Anyone tried Lidl's "satellite tv in a suitcase"? |
spiney wrote:
I've looked at the above links, but sorry, you can't have a portable digital satellite radio receiver (because it would require its own satellite dish!). Read what the thread title says: "New portable radio FOR digital satellite" not "New portable digital satellite radio receiver" If it's some sort of portable rf link back to a digibox ("battery powered videosender"), then ok, that would work, I'd imagine it'll be Wi-Fi. but not enough info is given to make this clear. Try and actually read what I wrote. I did say it has a range of 30m. How many satellites are orbiting earth 30 m away? Not brilliant, because whatever DAB's drawbacks, it really is portable, and also has local radio (Sky doesn't). Satellite: Good audio quality on most stations 80+ radio stations DAB: Low audio quality an average listener will receive 35 stations Conclusion: Satellite wipes the floor with DAB. -- Steve - www.digitalradiotech.co.uk - Digital Radio News & Info Find the cheapest Freeview, DAB & MP3 Player Prices: http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/fr..._receivers.htm http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/da...tal_radios.htm http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/mp...rs_1GB-5GB.htm http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/mp...e_capacity.htm |
er, i personally think above thread a bit pedantic, Sky are "trying" to
claim a portable radio receiver! Also, quite a few of the 8ish odd Sky radio channels are religious ranting rubbish! |
sorry, obvious typo, that should be "80ish Sky radio channels"!
|
In message .com
"spiney" wrote: Anyone tried Lidl's "satellite tv in a suitcase"? If you mean the plastic dish in the carry-case, it works very well and will give you R2, R4 and World Service over most of Western Europe, plus much else. On the other hand, the receiver which came with mine failed after about 18 months because a great many of the little electrolytic capacitors had popped. But I wasn't too disheartened because the user interface was so user-unfriendly. There are other DVB-s receivers capable of working on a 12V DC supply and at least one of them is much smaller and lighter. -- Richard L. |
DAB sounds worse than FM wrote:
Satellite: Good audio quality on most stations 80+ radio stations DAB: Low audio quality an average listener will receive 35 stations Conclusion: Satellite wipes the floor with DAB. Unles the station you want is only on DAB :-/ -- Phil Cook looking north over the park to the "Westminster Gasworks" |
spiney wrote:
Fair enough, and there's also Worldspace in Europe (not to mention digital shortwave broadcasting), What has digital shortwave got to do with satellites? -- Steve - www.digitalradiotech.co.uk - Digital Radio News & Info Find the cheapest Freeview, DAB & MP3 Player Prices: http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/fr..._receivers.htm http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/da...tal_radios.htm http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/mp...rs_1GB-5GB.htm http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/mp...e_capacity.htm |
spiney wrote:
er, i personally think above thread a bit pedantic, Sky are "trying" to claim a portable radio receiver! Call it what you want, but it does function like a portable radio, so I don't see what your problem is? Also, quite a few of the 8ish odd Sky radio channels are religious ranting rubbish! There's about 85 stations on digital satellite (they're free-to-air, apart from Talksport), and they include all the main digital radio "brands", and most stations are at a higher audio quality than on DAB and none are at a lower audio quality than on DAB. Compare what's available on the different platforms and what bit rates they use he http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/in...bit_rate_table (note that not all the stations listed for DAB are available in any given location, because some are local stations) -- Steve - www.digitalradiotech.co.uk - Digital Radio News & Info Find the cheapest Freeview, DAB & MP3 Player Prices: http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/fr..._receivers.htm http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/da...tal_radios.htm http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/mp...rs_1GB-5GB.htm http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/mp...e_capacity.htm |
Phil Cook wrote:
DAB sounds worse than FM wrote: Satellite: Good audio quality on most stations 80+ radio stations DAB: Low audio quality an average listener will receive 35 stations Conclusion: Satellite wipes the floor with DAB. Unles the station you want is only on DAB :-/ Such as? If you want a local station then surely you can receive it on FM? -- Steve - www.digitalradiotech.co.uk - Digital Radio News & Info Find the cheapest Freeview, DAB & MP3 Player Prices: http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/fr..._receivers.htm http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/da...tal_radios.htm http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/mp...rs_1GB-5GB.htm http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/mp...e_capacity.htm |
Phil Cook wrote:
DAB sounds worse than FM wrote: Satellite: Good audio quality on most stations 80+ radio stations DAB: Low audio quality an average listener will receive 35 stations Conclusion: Satellite wipes the floor with DAB. Unles the station you want is only on DAB :-/ Are there any staions that are *only* on DAB? -- Adrian A |
|
Mike Henry wrote:
In , "Adrian" wrote: Phil Cook wrote: Unles the station you want is only on DAB :-/ Are there any staions that are *only* on DAB? According to the list on the digitalradiotech website, just 3: DNN, Passion, Saga. Never heard of them, and I'm sure they won't be missed. They're all local or regional stations as well, so they're not even available everywhere. You did miss one out: Life. I doubt many would lose sleep over not having that though. -- Steve - www.digitalradiotech.co.uk - Digital Radio News & Info Find the cheapest Freeview, DAB & MP3 Player Prices: http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/fr..._receivers.htm http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/da...tal_radios.htm http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/mp...rs_1GB-5GB.htm http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/mp...e_capacity.htm |
|
Ad C wrote:
Satellite wipes the floor with DAB. FM wipes the floor of them both. In theory. Come to the rougher bits of London or Birmingham and you will get fzzz tzzz kssskz from pirates ruining your reception. -- Phil Cook looking north over the park to the "Westminster Gasworks" |
Phil Cook wrote:
Ad C wrote: Satellite wipes the floor with DAB. FM wipes the floor of them both. In theory. Come to the rougher bits of London or Birmingham and you will get fzzz tzzz kssskz from pirates ruining your reception. That's unfortunate, but that only applies to a small fraction of the population and it certainly does not excuse the fact that the audio quality on DAB has been degraded to a level that is significantly lower than FM with good reception. Remember that a large majority of people (I can't prove that, so don't ask me to, but I'm very confident that I'm right) get pretty good FM, so why should they have their audio quality degraded just for the sake of future profits for the commercial radio groups and to allow the BBC a better chance of renewing their Charter? -- Steve - www.digitalradiotech.co.uk - Digital Radio News & Info Find the cheapest Freeview, DAB & MP3 Player Prices: http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/fr..._receivers.htm http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/da...tal_radios.htm http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/mp...rs_1GB-5GB.htm http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/mp...e_capacity.htm |
spiney wrote:
I've looked at the above links, but sorry, you can't have a portable digital satellite radio receiver (because it would require its own satellite dish!). If it's some sort of portable rf link back to a digibox ("battery powered videosender"), then ok, that would work, but not enough info is given to make this clear. It seems fairly obvious. Not brilliant, because whatever DAB's drawbacks, it really is portable, and also has local radio (Sky doesn't). There's no local radio on DAB in my locality. There is local radio on satellite in my locality. |
Kristoff Bonne wrote:
Gegroet, spiney schreef: I've looked at the above links, but sorry, you can't have a portable digital satellite radio receiver (because it would require its own satellite dish!). If it's some sort of portable rf link back to a digibox ("battery powered videosender"), then ok, that would work, but not enough info is given to make this clear. Does it offer some kind of "return-channel" so that you can "control" the receiver from the kitchen/garden/...? E.g. can you switch to another radio-station or start or shut down the receiver at a distance? Assuming it has a line-out socket it will be quite useful to get stereo sound on a remote TV connected to the sky box via RF.... |
spiney wrote:
Not brilliant, because whatever DAB's drawbacks, it really is portable, and also has local radio (Sky doesn't). Unless you include most of London's local stations, plus a few large regional commercial stations, and (if you define them as such) the BBC's five 'Celtic' radio services, Wales, Cymru, Scotland, Nan Gaidheal, and Ulster. -- Mark Please replace invalid and invalid with gmx and net to reply. |
Just to pick up on a few things (above) ......
DAB has local stations, depending on where you are, admittedly usually just independent ones, not BBC local. XM and Worldspace exist, but are mainly or wholly subscription, and more like terrestrial networks in coverage (you can't "point at" a particular satellite). I mentioned shortwave DRM because it's also quite similar in concept. I think the Sky description of "digital radio" is extremely misleading, seeing as it's only a wireless loudspeaker link to an existing digibox, and the wording is deliberately phrased so as to disguise this (eg, "compatible with"!). I also find fm pirate radio highly annoying, eg when trying to listen to R4 on Walkman, particularly since they often come up right next to it, with much too big power/deviation, sometimes making the legit stations unreceivable. It's quite remarkable that you can be sent to prison for not having a tv license, yet these pirate stations seem immune to any official sanctions! |
spiney wrote:
Just to pick up on a few things (above) ...... DAB has local stations, depending on where you are, admittedly usually just independent ones, not BBC local. XM and Worldspace exist, but are mainly or wholly subscription, and more like terrestrial networks in coverage (you can't "point at" a particular satellite). You're going to struggle picking up XM because it covers the US, not the UK. I mentioned shortwave DRM because it's also quite similar in concept. It's not transmitted from satellites. I think the Sky description of "digital radio" is extremely misleading, The Sky Gnome allows you to receive digital radio, so what's the problem? seeing as it's only a wireless loudspeaker link to an existing digibox, and the wording is deliberately phrased so as to disguise this (eg, "compatible with"!). I bet you're one of these people that object to radio being delivered via the internet being called radio, and TV delivered via broadband being called TV? I also find fm pirate radio highly annoying, eg when trying to listen to R4 on Walkman, particularly since they often come up right next to it, with much too big power/deviation, sometimes making the legit stations unreceivable. That's unfortunate. But that doesn't justify them degrading the audio quality on DAB to sub-FM levels. -- Steve - www.digitalradiotech.co.uk - Digital Radio News & Info Find the cheapest Freeview, DAB & MP3 Player Prices: http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/fr..._receivers.htm http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/da...tal_radios.htm http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/mp...rs_1GB-5GB.htm http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/mp...e_capacity.htm |
to above poster (DAB sounds worse ...).
I never said XM was available outside USA. Similarly, worldspace is European/Africa only, although with some regional variations in this case. DRM is shortwave, which i also said above (!). The point being that all these systems are similar in type of coverage, and require subscription. 3Ghz is received on portable radios, but only having tiny antennae, so the channel capacity is much reduced, there are far fewer stations (remember, Ku band carries tv and radio simultaneously!). On the other hand, Ku band sat radio is directional, giving much more choice, and many of the stations are unencrypted. I've said what my problem with the Gnome is. Why on earth would i object to people getting broadcast channels via the Internet? You don't like DAB? OK, then, just don't use it. |
spiney wrote:
to above poster (DAB sounds worse ...). I never said XM was available outside USA. Similarly, worldspace is European/Africa only, although with some regional variations in this case. Plus Asia. DRM is shortwave, which i also said above (!). But what has that got to do with satellite? The point being that all these systems are similar in type of coverage, and require subscription. So? 3Ghz is received on portable radios, but only having tiny antennae, so the channel capacity is much reduced, The channel capacity is lower on the radio systems because they use a narrower bandwidth. Not because they use tiny antennas (at 3 GHz a half-wave dipole is only 5 cm long). there are far fewer stations (remember, Ku band carries tv and radio simultaneously!). Yeah, and the bandwidth used is enormous. On the other hand, Ku band sat radio is directional, All satellite transmissions are directional because they're transmitted from a dish, and dishes are inherently directional. giving much more choice, and many of the stations are unencrypted. I've said what my problem with the Gnome is. But what *is* your problem with the Gnome? Why on earth would i object to people getting broadcast channels via the Internet? Some do object, and given that you object to a receiver of digital radio being called a digital radio then I thought you'd object to that too. You don't like DAB? OK, then, just don't use it. I don't, apart from occasionally listening to check what it sounds like, and it always sounds utterly ****e. -- Steve - www.digitalradiotech.co.uk - Digital Radio News & Info Find the cheapest Freeview, DAB & MP3 Player Prices: http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/fr..._receivers.htm http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/da...tal_radios.htm http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/mp...rs_1GB-5GB.htm http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/mp...e_capacity.htm |
I can't reply in full to all these rather pedantic quibbles, however
...... Worldstar covers part of Asia, not all of it. All satellite is not directional, XM isn't for instance. The way Gnome is advertised is misleading, that's all. Otherwise, I'm sure it's just what some people want. FIne. A smaller antenna is inherently worse, as SNR is lower, therefore channel capacity is reduced, regardeless of other factors (see Shannon's formula). |
spiney wrote:
I can't reply in full to all these rather pedantic quibbles, however ..... Worldstar covers part of Asia, not all of it. What were you saying about pedantic quibbles? All satellite is not directional, XM isn't for instance. The XM signal WILL BE transmitted from a dish on the spacecraft, and dishes are ALL directional, therefore XM's signal is directional. The way Gnome is advertised is misleading, that's all. Otherwise, I'm sure it's just what some people want. FIne. A smaller antenna is inherently worse, as SNR is lower, therefore channel capacity is reduced, regardeless of other factors (see Shannon's formula). That's nonsense though, because the field strength for XM is far, far higher than the field strength for DVB-S signals. And: C = B log2 (1 + SNR) C = capacity, B = bandwidth. Therefore, capacity is directly proportional to bandwidth, but weakly dependent on SNR. Basically, the spectral efficiency in bits/s/Hz (capacity / bandwidth) isn't much different for XM and DVB-S, and it's the bandwidth that is by far the main reason why DVB-S has such a massive capacity compared to XM. -- Steve - www.digitalradiotech.co.uk - Digital Radio News & Info Find the cheapest Freeview, DAB & MP3 Player Prices: http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/fr..._receivers.htm http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/da...tal_radios.htm http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/mp...rs_1GB-5GB.htm http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/mp...e_capacity.htm |
All radio waves are directional, yes, I agree.
But a Ku dish antenna has to be pointed accurately (you may have noticed), 3GHz ones like xm don't. that's the point of it (although, you certainly could use a fixed aerial for better reception). Whether you can decode a digital signal depends directly on received SNR, which depends on antenna aperture. A dish is much better in that respect. Weakly dependent on snr??? Not from the actual formula, which you've given! Yes, ok, a higher field strength will give better reception. Anything else? How about my punctuation? Phraseology? There must be something! |
"spiney" wrote in message ups.com... snip [ pirate radio stations ] It's quite remarkable that you can be sent to prison for not having a tv license, yet these pirate stations seem immune to any official sanctions! There are sanctions but the problem is tracing the pirate radio station, and then possibly tracing the people behind it (I suspect many such pirate stations have a broader agenda than just playing music IYSWIM...), all the TVLA people have to do is turn up at any address without a licence. |
spiney wrote:
All radio waves are directional, yes, I agree. That is not what I meant. Directional wrt antennas means that signals are more concentrated in some directions rather than others. All dishes transmit directional signals. But a Ku dish antenna has to be pointed accurately (you may have noticed), 3GHz ones like xm don't. that's the point of it (although, you certainly could use a fixed aerial for better reception). No, that's not the point at all, because the XM satellite uses higher transmission powers to offset the lower antenna gain due to not having a directional dish antenna at the receiver. Whether you can decode a digital signal depends directly on received SNR, which depends on antenna aperture. A dish is much better in that respect. A dish isn't very good for reception in your car, though. Weakly dependent on snr??? Not from the actual formula, which you've given! Wrong. I will demonstrate: C = B log2 (1 + SNR) C is directly proportional to B Changing SNR by a factor of 1 million (60 dB) changes C by (ignoring the 1 in the equation): log2 (1,000,000) = 19.9 Therefore, C is weakly dependent on SNR. QED. Yes, ok, a higher field strength will give better reception. Not necessariily. If the field strength is adequate to give a BER (bit error rate) of effectively zero, then higher field strength will not give better reception, because it is already effectively perfect. Anything else? How about my punctuation? Phraseology? There must be something! No, that is all. -- Steve - www.digitalradiotech.co.uk - Digital Radio News & Info Find the cheapest Freeview, DAB & MP3 Player Prices: http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/fr..._receivers.htm http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/da...tal_radios.htm http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/mp...rs_1GB-5GB.htm http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/mp...e_capacity.htm |
In article , DAB sounds worse
than FM writes spiney wrote: ----------Cut---------- I think the Sky description of "digital radio" is extremely misleading, The Sky Gnome allows you to receive digital radio, so what's the problem? It's wireless speakers or headphones, I can plug my 863MHz base in to a DVB-T box but it does not make it a digital radio. seeing as it's only a wireless loudspeaker link to an existing digibox, and the wording is deliberately phrased so as to disguise this (eg, "compatible with"!). I bet you're one of these people that object to radio being delivered via the internet being called radio, and TV delivered via broadband being called TV? TV delivered by broadband is still television, as is CCTV, CATV, SSTV over POTS. I also find fm pirate radio highly annoying, eg when trying to listen to R4 on Walkman, particularly since they often come up right next to it, with much too big power/deviation, sometimes making the legit stations unreceivable. One reason for using DAB in a metropolis. That's unfortunate. But that doesn't justify them degrading the audio quality on DAB to sub-FM levels. Nothing does -- Ian G8ILZ |
"DAB sounds worse than FM" wrote in message
... I bet you're one of these people that object to radio being delivered via the internet being called radio, and TV delivered via broadband being called TV? Or a radio controlled clock a 'clock'. -- Max Demian |
"Kristoff Bonne" schreef in bericht ... Gegroet, Max Demian schreef: I bet you're one of these people that object to radio being delivered via the internet being called radio, and TV delivered via broadband being called TV? Or a radio controlled clock a 'clock'. Well, some of them are marketed as an "atomic clock". Is this correct? It has atoms if it exists :-) gr, hwh |
In article , Kristoff Bonne
writes Gegroet, Max Demian schreef: I bet you're one of these people that object to radio being delivered via the internet being called radio, and TV delivered via broadband being called TV? Or a radio controlled clock a 'clock'. Well, some of them are marketed as an "atomic clock". Is this correct? Arguably they all depend on properties of atoms. -- Ian G8ILZ |
On Sat, 06 Aug 2005 00:37:56 +0200, hwh wrote:
"Kristoff Bonne" schreef in bericht ... Gegroet, Max Demian schreef: I bet you're one of these people that object to radio being delivered via the internet being called radio, and TV delivered via broadband being called TV? Or a radio controlled clock a 'clock'. Well, some of them are marketed as an "atomic clock". Is this correct? It has atoms if it exists :-) gr, hwh What a load of old photons. |
On Thu, 04 Aug 2005 19:04:01 +0100, Phil Cook
wrote: FM wipes the floor of them both. In theory. Come to the rougher bits of London or Birmingham and you will get fzzz tzzz kssskz from pirates ruining your reception. Yes but on FM you get the pirates, many of which have better sound quality and more interesting programming than the so called professionals. One of the great tragedies of DAB is that there hasn't been provision for public access or small scale local broadcasting. I wonder if some of my favorite local stations such as Delta or Radio Jackie will ever be available on DAB. I also wonder why the broadcasters feel the need to simulcast the large scale FM stations on DAB. Radios 1-4, Capital, Kiss etc are all duplicated on DAB in London when they're available in better quality and over a larger area on FM. We abandoned AM/FM simulcasting in the 80's, why start again? Rgds Jonathan |
In article , JC
writes On Thu, 04 Aug 2005 19:04:01 +0100, Phil Cook wrote: FM wipes the floor of them both. In theory. Come to the rougher bits of London or Birmingham and you will get fzzz tzzz kssskz from pirates ruining your reception. Yes but on FM you get the pirates, many of which have better sound quality and more interesting programming than the so called professionals. Funny that, but didn't commercial radio in the UK get started due to some pirate broadcasters?. Trouble is that once they go light like Kiss FM and choice et al they soon loose their roots very rapidly;(..... One of the great tragedies of DAB is that there hasn't been provision for public access or small scale local broadcasting. I wonder if some of my favorite local stations such as Delta or Radio Jackie will ever be available on DAB. Very much doubt it. I know the lads at radio Jackie and how much it costs to go on a DAB MUX and I can't see just how they could afford it even at 64 K mono... I also wonder why the broadcasters feel the need to simulcast the large scale FM stations on DAB. Radios 1-4, Capital, Kiss etc are all duplicated on DAB in London when they're available in better quality and over a larger area on FM. We abandoned AM/FM simulcasting in the 80's, why start again? Ask OFCOM who will do a consultation for you!. -- Tony Sayer |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:18 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HomeCinemaBanter.com